Martin, while I agree that the market has difficulty evaluating development stage biotechs, Westergaard's view of the situation is terribly simplistic and appears prescient only in hindsight. When sitting on top of the next biotech rally, it will look completely nescient.
As celeryroot says, these people may be paid promoters of questionable integrity and may be engaged in the Big Brother business of invading privacy and monitoring comments made on SI that might be detrimental to certain interests. Their comments should be considered in this light.
Check out:
exchange2000.com
For more information, you might want to look through the first 70 or so posts on the Pluvia vs. Westergaard thread.
Personally, I would give no credibility to anything they say. However, there is no question that development stage biotechs are risky and that some are far riskier than others. Of course the high risk entails high reward--consider AGPH, IMNX, IDPH, etc. Furthermore, one must have enough patience to put up with extreme volatility and wait years for profitability. Given its pipeline and current alliances, there is little question that LGND will be highly profitable at some point. The question is when and will there be more buying opportunities at better prices between now and then. Differences of opinion in this regard are what make a market. |
